Although AMD positions its FirePro V9800 against Nvidia's Quadro 6000, it doesn't take a 6000 to offer up competitive performance, we've found. If you're more interested in a comparison to the 6000, know that it includes more shader processors (448 vs. 352), more memory (6 GB vs. 2.5 GB), more memory bandwidth, and consumes more power. Priced at $5000, it's like the FirePro V9800 in that it appeals to a very tiny sliver of the market who can put its massively large frame buffer to use.

Can you explain me why do have made renderings tests with this cards? They don't effect anything since this render engines have no CUDA or OPENCL.You could have put there an Intel crap and the results would be the same.

What a big mistake in testing with cpu based methods!I work in Vue a lot and when the scene starts to count billions of polygons my poor 4850 is getting down to it's knees, when I try to move something on the scene, or move the camera. This is where these cards can make the difference.

This is where you have to test these cards not in cpu based final renderings. Only in specific CUDA enabled renderers we can see the gpu to get in final render progress and only nvidia ones.

The right question is how these cards manage with the frame rate in 4 views with thousands of objects an billions of polygons.

No offense, but next time give the testing review to someone who actually have some experience in 3D, because first of all some things are making a conflict with preview and well informed articles about pro cards and second if you work with 3D you know what you are wanting for these cards and what they promise to do!